THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY et al v. TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
| THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY doing business as THE NEWS AND OBSERVER PUBLISHING COMPANY, CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP and MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C. |
| TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA |
| 1:2021cv00765 |
| October 4, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
| L PATRICK AULD |
| LORETTA C BIGGS |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. § 2201 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 23, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 21
NOTICE of Initial Pretrial Conference Hearing: Initial Pretrial Conference Hearing set for 1/31/2022 09:30 AM in Greensboro Courtroom #1A before MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD. (Garrett, Kim)
|
|
Filing 20
ANSWER to #1 Complaint,, with Jury Demand by TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA. (BARBER-JONES, KATHERINE)
|
|
TEXT ORDER granting #17 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall file any response to #9 Motion for Preliminary Injunction by 12/20/2021. In #17 Motion, counsel for Defendant (as an officer of the Court) represented that, despite the exercise of due diligence, Defendant required additional time to gather the information necessary to respond to #9 Motion. In #18 Response, Plaintiffs did not dispute the veracity of that representation, but argued that the Court should deny the requested relief because any delay in resolving #9 Motion would irreparably injure Plaintiffs. In other words, Plaintiffs essentially would have the Court decide that they will prevail on #9 Motion (which requires a showing of irreparable injury) before Defendant has had a reasonable opportunity to oppose #9 Motion and then use that decision to deny Defendant the time it reasonably would need to oppose #9 Motion. The Court declines to adopt that approach, particularly given the timeline of events leading up to Plaintiffs' filing of #17 Motion. Specifically, according to #1 Complaint (filed on 10/04/2021), Plaintiffs learned about Defendant's policy change, which Plaintiffs seek to enjoin, in September 2021; however, despite the fact that #1 Complaint expressly included a demand for preliminary injunctive relief, Plaintiffs delayed until 10/26/2021, before filing #9 Motion. Plaintiffs' decision to take additional time in preparing #9 Motion undermines the notion that the Court must deny Defendant the time it reasonably needs to respond to #9 Motion. Issued by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 11/25/2021. (AULD, L.)
|
|
Motion Referred: RE: #17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #9 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction , to MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD. (Blay, Debbie)
|
|
Filing 19
REPLY, filed by Defendant TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, to Response to #17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #9 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA. (BARBER-JONES, KATHERINE)
|
|
Filing 18
RESPONSE in Opposition re #17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #9 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA filed by CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP, MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C., THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY. Replies due by 12/3/2021 (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 17
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #9 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(HARTZOG, DAN)
|
|
ORDER granting #16 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer for TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA. Answer due by 11/29/2021. Signed by John Brubaker, Clerk of Court, on 10/29/2021. (Brubaker, John)
|
|
Filing 16
CONSENT MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint,, by TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order for MEOT)(HARTZOG, DAN) Notified on 10/29/2021 by attorney Dan Hartzog, Jr. that Plaintiff consents to this motion. Daniel, J)
|
|
Filing 15
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed pursuant to FRCP 7.1(a) by Defendant TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA (HARTZOG, DAN)
|
|
Filing 14
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by attorney KATHERINE MARIE BARBER-JONES on behalf of Defendant TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA (BARBER-JONES, KATHERINE)
|
|
Filing 13
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by attorney DAN MCCORD HARTZOG, JR on behalf of Defendant TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA (HARTZOG, DAN)
|
|
Filing 12
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by attorney JONATHAN REID REICH on behalf of Plaintiff DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP (REICH, JONATHAN)
|
|
Filing 11
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by attorney REID CALWELL ADAMS, JR on behalf of Plaintiff DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP (ADAMS, REID)
|
|
Filing 10
BRIEF re #9 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Plaintiffs CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP, MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C., THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY filed by CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP, MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C., THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY. (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 9
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP, MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C., THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY. Response to Motion due by 11/16/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Ex. A - Drivers Privacy Protection Act, #2 Exhibit Ex. B - 2013 Atty Gen. Conclusion, #3 Exhibit Ex. C - March 2021 letter, #4 Exhibit Ex. D - Public Interest v. Reed, #5 Exhibit Ex. E - Decl. of Robyn Tomlin, #6 Exhibit Ex. F - Decl. of Rick Gall, #7 Exhibit Ex. G - Daily Dispatch article, #8 Exhibit Ex. H - Ind. Tribune Article, #9 Exhibit Ex. I - Daily Reflector Article, #10 Exhibit Ex. J - Decl. of DeMayo, #11 Exhibit Ex. K - Decl. of Balaban)(RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 8
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE by Plaintiffs CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP, MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C., THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY by Certified Mail. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Proof of Service)(RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Case ASSIGNED to JUDGE LORETTA C. BIGGS and MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD. (Sheets, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 7
Notice of Right to Consent. Counsel shall serve the attached form on all parties. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form) (Sheets, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 6
Summons Issued as to TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA. (Sheets, Jamie)
|
|
Filing 5
Corporate Disclosure Statement by MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C.. (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 4
Corporate Disclosure Statement by DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP. (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 3
Corporate Disclosure Statement by CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED. (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 2
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed pursuant to FRCP 7.1(a) by Plaintiff THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY D/B/A THE NEWS AND OBSERVER PUBLISHING COMPANY. (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0418-3146136)(Related Case # 16cv542, 16cv925), filed by THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY, CAPITOL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, MARCARI, RUSSOTTO, SPENCER & BALABAN, P.C., DEMAYO LAW OFFICES, LLP. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A - Accident Report, #3 Exhibit B - N.C. Attorney General Advisory Opinion, #4 Exhibit C - Department of Justice Memorandum, #5 Exhibit D - WRAL News Article, #6 Exhibit E - N&O News Article) (RISINGER, BRADLEY)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
